[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: Change ?
From:       "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Ga=EBl?= Duval" <duval () criuc ! unicaen ! fr>
Date:       1998-03-10 11:54:17
[Download RAW message or body]

Alan Cox wrote:

> > The main point, IMHO, is that when you want to code an object-oriented GUI,you
> > better have to code with an object-oriented language and to use
> > object-oriented librairies. KDE/Qt (C++) does. Gnome/Gtk doesn't, and
> > will never.
>
> Not accurate. Firstly C++ is not a good object oriented language (hey it
> works tho sort of),

hmm... sure it's better than C as an OO-language !     °oO8-)

> secondly there is a lot object based work going on in
> Gtk/Gnome and C++ bindings that (not suprisingly for KDE people 8)) folks
> keep finding are easy to use for a GUI app.

I don't think the problem is whether it's easy to use or not.Signals and slots are
not *very*easy to use (IMHO!),
but surely better than those awful (void*)callbacks... :-)
I mean : I'm not really in love with "segmentation fault".
And I know one thing : I used to program with XForms
which generated a lot of segfaults.
When I make a program with Qt, it works and never
crashes...
I'm afraid Gtk is closer to XForms than to Qt.
(sorry, I didn't have the time to really try Gtk, just had
a look at the source code from The Gimp... :-> ).

> Having KDE versus Gnome means everyone loses. Gnome has one real strength
> - its not using any proprietary components. FreeQT/Harmony solves that
> once done.

First they tell they will never make a complete clone of Qt.I was told there are
30 000 lines of code in Qt. It's big.
Secondly, I think you are right, but *why* did the Gnome
team decided to clone KDE instead of cloning Qt ?

I think they just not like the KDE. That's all. They want
to build a very ambitious Desktop, "à la Emacs", with
some Lisp and a lot of new concepts...
I find it very interesting because I'm in Computer Sciences.
But sure Gnome will never be a good alternative to
Windoze...
And I want this alternative to become a reality, and I'm
sure I'm not alone... :-)


> > If you want to modify the source from Qt, you just can use
> > the C++ inheritance mechanisms and overcharge the method definitions.
>
> and pray they are something you can fix. Mind you I had pondered if the
> right way to do a freeqt was to gradually override methods and objects
> in the real Qt until none were left.

:-)

Cheers,

    Gaël.

--
 ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Gael DUVAL - Reseaux & Applications documentaires   //
/ LINUX, LINUX, LINUX                                ///
 /////////////////////////////////////////////////////

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]